[i]And shepherds we shall be, for thee my Lord for thee, Power hath descended forth from thy hand, that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command, we shall flow a river forth to thee, and teeming with souls shall it ever be. In nomine patris, et fili, et spiritus sancti.[/i]
Eraser wrote:And even if gypsies in the subway can do this, I cannot, and I'll never be able to, and thus I am impressed with the display of skill here.
But that's not a good reason to be impressed imo.
I can't speak marrocan, but i'm not impressed when a maroccan can.
I was a lot like that too when I was drawing back in the day. Lot of good technical reproducing skills but very little originality... Only so much you can do in pencil though.
Eraser wrote:And even if gypsies in the subway can do this, I cannot, and I'll never be able to, and thus I am impressed with the display of skill here.
But that's not a good reason to be impressed imo.
I can't speak marrocan, but i'm not impressed when a maroccan can.
of course its a good reason to be impressed. granted, its also not the only reason to be impressed, but still. from that line there it makes it sound like theres a direct correlation between being impressed and what one cannot do, but i think theres more to eraser being impressed than just that. drawing well is a special talent. even if some gypsies can do it, doesnt mean that its not unique; which i think is a criteria for whats impressive.
if everyone drew van gogh paintings, would you be impressed with every one of them?
that being said, i like this girl's drawings. they look nice.
Since we're talking about art, you need to see to the subject matter too, technical brilliance is pretty much irrelevant IMO. It's just like a musician, he can be brilliant and technically superior to his peers, but as long as he plays shit music I will still respect and be more impressed by someone who instead writes great songs but perhaps is not as technically competent.